SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — Illinois became the last state in the nation to allow public possession of concealed guns as lawmakers rushed Tuesday to finalize a proposal ahead of a federal court’s deadline.

Both chambers of the Legislature voted to override changes Gov. Pat Quinn made to the bill they approved more than a month ago. Even some critics of the law argued it was better to approve something rather than risk the courts allowing virtually unregulated concealed weapons in Chicago, which has endured severe gun violence in recent months.

The Senate voted 41-17 in favor of the override Tuesday afternoon after the House voted 77-31, margins that met the three-fifths threshold needed to set aside the amendatory veto. Quinn had used his veto authority to suggest changes such as prohibiting guns in restaurants that serve alcohol and limiting gun-toting citizens to one firearm at a time.
.
.

If you enjoyed reading about "Official: Illinois becomes last State in the nation to have Concealed Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

carpboy

July 9, 2013, 05:03 PM

Congrats to all those in Ill who worked so hard to make this happen.There is still much work to be done.All 50 states and DC need to go Shall Issue or Constitutional Carry.

Archaic

July 9, 2013, 06:08 PM

Now its time to go after NYC and free them from oppression.

Midwest

July 9, 2013, 07:12 PM

Congratulations to our friends in Illinois. Obviously more information will be forthcoming on whether Illinois will have reciprocation with other states. Also note the 16 hours of training required. So they would need a FOID (Firearms Owners ID Card) as well as the Conceal Carry Permit in their possession.

"...permits anyone with a Firearm Owner's Identification card who has passed a background check and undergone gun-safety training of 16 hours — longest of any state — to obtain a concealed-carry permit for $150...."

Maybe once this battle is over we can concentrate on getting carry permits for everyone in NJ,NY,MD,CA,PR and HI.

Again, congratulations Illinois!

BoilerUP

July 9, 2013, 07:25 PM

...because the kind of citizens who would get a concealed carry permit are the cause of violence in Chicago...

DonP

July 9, 2013, 07:56 PM

3/5 majority required to over ride.

The final tally was Illinois Senate: 41 Yea/17 Nay; House 77 Yea/31 Nay.

Not even close. Quinn looks even more pointless and impotent than usual now.

Now, 60 days for the Illinois State Police to define training requirements and 180 days from today to have the whole system up and running.

The rules, straight from the shiny new Illinois State Police website.

The applicant must:

- Be at least 21 years of age
- Have a valid FOID card
- Have not been convicted or found guilty in this State or any other state of:
• A misdemeanor involving the use or threat of physical force or violence to any person within the last 5 years.
• 2 or more violations related to driving while under the influence of alcohol, other drug or drugs, intoxicating compound or compounds, or any combination thereof, within the last 5 years.
- Not be the subject of a pending arrest warrant, prosecution, or proceeding for an offense or action that could lead to disqualification.
- Not have been in a residential or court-ordered treatment for alcoholism, alcohol detoxification, or drug treatment within the last 5 years.
- Submit a completed Concealed Carry License Application.
- Successfully complete 16 hours of firearms training, including classroom and range instruction. (veterans get 8 hours of training credit)

Our next goal - getting some of the forbidden zones repealed

Carl N. Brown

July 9, 2013, 07:57 PM

Post #5 I hope that was meant to be sarcastic.

We have carry permits in TN since 1996. When the paper ran stories of gun crimes or reckless acts with guns, I ran the names of the suspects through the handgun carry permit database and got no hits. (the only good use I have seen of that database.)

The kind of citizens who would not get a concealed carry permit are the cause of violence in Tennessee.

The kind of citizens who would get a concealed carry permit are not the cause of violence in Tennessee.

I suspect it will prove true in Chicago as well.

rugerman07

July 9, 2013, 07:58 PM

6 months before applications are available, ISP has 3 months to approve or deny applications, an unreasonable, long list of places you can't carry, so long, that it defeats the purpose of even getting a permit. All this for a $150.00 permit, good for 5 years, plus the cost of a 16 hour training course,(I wonder how much that will be?). Talk about a hollow victory!!!

Blackbeard

July 9, 2013, 07:58 PM

Anyone got a list of the slaughter zones? (i.e. gun-free)

usmarine0352_2005

July 9, 2013, 08:14 PM

6 months before applications are available, ISP has 3 months to approve or deny applications, an unreasonable, long list of places you can't carry, so long, that it defeats the purpose of even getting a permit. All this for a $150.00 permit, good for 5 years, plus the cost of a 16 hour training course,(I wonder how much that will be?). Talk about a hollow victory!!!

It's a start. They can go from there.

I would bring a lawsuit that said 16 hours of training and $150 is unrealistic for the poor, someone like a single mom who couldn't miss 2 days of work and couldn't afford a $150 fee to exercise a Constitutional right.
.

Old Fuff

July 9, 2013, 08:45 PM

It depends on the judge that found the previous law to be unconstitutional in the light of Heller and MacDonald.

While he didn’t have to, he gave the Illinois legislature the opportunity to pass a new law, or amend the one on the books, to remedy his objections. Now that the Illinois government has taken the opportunity to pass this new law the judge will have to decide if those objections have been remedied. If not I suspect he will reject the proposed remedy (law). Otherwise this case will be finished unless someone files an appeal.

So at this point the case isn't over. For example, some of the overboard requirements to obtain a carry permit might not pass muster in light of what is required elsewhere, and so exceed that permitted under MacDonald, and "reasonable regulation" allowed under Heller.

JFtheGR8

July 9, 2013, 08:56 PM

I would hope the fees and 16 hours of training would be the first thing that get reduced. The hunter safety course or being a veteran would count for 8 hours of training so that does help some. I am going to take the hunter safety course with my daughter in September just to get the 8 hours training credit. It's free so why not take it plus she needs it to get a hunting license.

Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android

vamo

July 9, 2013, 09:03 PM

Everyone complaining, about this: its better than any of the may issue states, and the prohibited places really aren't that much different than what more gun friendly states have. The only thing that's really out of the ordinary is the 16hrs of training.

Ask the folks on this board from Maryland about all the permits that have been recently issued there ...

Wishoot

July 9, 2013, 09:44 PM

Let's see if Illinois ever grants reciprocity with other states.

splithoof

July 9, 2013, 10:02 PM

Now is also a great opportunity to formulate the list of legislators who must be punished.

JoeMal

July 9, 2013, 10:07 PM

Congrats to everyone in IL. As a former resident, I know how long they've been waiting. My only question is will my Texas CHL hold up there when I visit family. It's still unfortunate I can't even buy ammo in that state due to my FOID being expired. I'd love to see that go to the wayside next

Steve32

July 9, 2013, 10:17 PM

Video report.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppmRxh_JGQ4
:)

mp510

July 9, 2013, 10:30 PM

Maybe once this battle is over we can concentrate on getting carry permits for everyone in NJ,NY,MD,CA,PR and HI.

I thought that there was a court ruling in Puerto Rico that was supposed to have the effect of making the island effectively shall-issue. Did that end up getting overturned or kaboshed somehow?

mf-dif

July 9, 2013, 10:36 PM

Still much fighting to do. But this should send a message. I was sitting after work with co-workers who the majority are on the other side. They had no idea this was even happening today. :uhoh:

While we've been firing off emails and phone calls for weeks. They may talk politics, but they do not act as we have.

PonyKiller

July 9, 2013, 10:55 PM

so if Illinois was last, what does that make jersey.. last and a half? Jersey may have a concealed carry law but no normal civilians can carry

Midwest

July 9, 2013, 11:19 PM

I thought that there was a court ruling in Puerto Rico that was supposed to have the effect of making the island effectively shall-issue. Did that end up getting overturned or kaboshed somehow?
I thought it is still up in the air yet. According to this, PR is still may issue.
http://www.usacarry.com/puerto_rico_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

But yet there is this....

"The Puerto Rico Appellate Case Recognizing a Second Amendment Right to Carry Guns in Public"

so if Illinois was last, what does that make jersey.. last and a half? Jersey may have a concealed carry law but no normal civilians can carry
I think NJ, MD and Hawaii are the only states left where ordinary citizens cannot carry. NY and CA do allow conceal carry in certain counties of the state.

Archaic

July 9, 2013, 11:42 PM

Really, except for the 16 hours (Texas is 10), its not much different than most other states. The defining word is SHALL. Compared to CA, NY, MA, etc., that word is golden.

Trent

July 10, 2013, 12:09 AM

Fight isn't over yet, not by a long shot.

They're going to use this law as a new battleground to make deals on other issues.

The question that remains is will it get whittled away slowly to further uselessness, or made stronger with time?

The list of gun free zones is staggering.

T2K

July 10, 2013, 12:09 AM

Very glad to hear this.

No doubt, the fight isn't over and the anti-Constitutionalists will try to subvert this with all sorts of local rulings.

Keep at it!

JTHunter

July 10, 2013, 01:29 AM

Last year's attempt was a better bill. As originally introduced, this bill was barely acceptable. After the Senate screwed around with it, it got worse. :mad: Unfortunately, that's what got passed. :barf: Thankfully, Baldy lost big-time! :neener:

What gets me is that Judge Posner said "reasonable restrictions" in his ruling last December. :confused: Considering the higher costs, more hours of training, lack of reciprocity with other states, how does the Legislature call this PoS "reasonable"?? :cuss:

il.bill

July 10, 2013, 02:40 AM

Wshew!

HexHead

July 10, 2013, 08:36 AM

Fight isn't over yet, not by a long shot.

They're going to use this law as a new battleground to make deals on other issues.

The question that remains is will it get whittled away slowly to further uselessness, or made stronger with time?

The list of gun free zones is staggering.
Yeah, I'm sure Kim Jung Emmanuel is just going to roll over and accept this.

junglebob

July 10, 2013, 09:26 AM

Mgkdrgn, The bill that passed is a shall issue bill. This is Illinois, thankfully not Maryland, New Jersey or Hawaii.

To all those who said "They'll be packing on the trains in Tokyo before Illinois gets carry. Time to sit down to a nice meal of CROW!

junglebob

July 10, 2013, 09:35 AM

Kim Jung Emmanuel is just going to have to accept that he no longer has complete control over the fiefdom of Chicago. It will probably take some lawsuits against the city for unlawful arrests and big payouts from the city though. The bill had preemption so except for the AWB in Chicago so the ordinances requiring a Chicago Firearms License and special transport requirements more restrictive than state law, go away.

I have no doubt that Illinoiscarry.com will after 9 years of fighting to get license to carry will continue to fight to reduce the restrictions to carry in the bill.

il.bill

July 10, 2013, 09:49 AM

At the least, my home state (with a big push from the Federal Courts) has actually admitted that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution does exist!

- some restrictions apply, not available at all locations, void where prohibited -

Archaic

July 10, 2013, 09:50 AM

Even though I'll never be able to carry in Illinois with my Texas CHL, I'm sure that as soon as you guys start getting licenses issued that Texas will recognise Illinois CHL holders.

mdauben

July 10, 2013, 10:05 AM

Last year's attempt was a better bill. As originally introduced, this bill was barely acceptable. After the Senate screwed around with it, it got worse. Unfortunately, that's what got passed. Thankfully, Baldy lost big-time!

I totally agree that its a horrible law, but honestly its more than I ever expected IL to see. Just don't give up the fight, you have your foot in the door, now keep pushing to get a better CCW law. ;)

skimbell

July 10, 2013, 12:57 PM

Really, except for the 16 hours (Texas is 10), its not much different than most other states. The defining word is SHALL. Compared to CA, NY, MA, etc., that word is golden.
The 16 hours sounds a lot worse than it actually is. I talked to my Representative Monday before he left for Springfield and he mentioned that-IIRC-Vets get 8 hrs. waived. Completion of ANY hunter safety course excuses you from 8 hrs. There were a couple of other ways to be excused that I'm not real sure of yet.
Some people are going to get hit with the full 16 hrs. no doubt, but it seems like the GA made a good attempt to cut some of the "training" from a lot of citizens.

Trent

July 10, 2013, 01:51 PM

Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

The M

July 10, 2013, 02:10 PM

Anyone got a list of the slaughter zones? (i.e. gun-free)

"Chicago Democrats repulsed by gun violence got a long list of places deemed off limits to guns, including schools, libraries, parks and mass transit buses and trains. The law will allow diners to carry weapons into restaurants and other establishments where liquor comprises no more than 50 percent of gross sales."

splithoof

July 10, 2013, 04:20 PM

Chicago Democrats. Yep.

JFtheGR8

July 10, 2013, 04:54 PM

Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

I'm not surprised the ISP would issue such a statement. If they arrested someone under the old uuw law it surely would be contested in court. The Illinois tax payers would foot the bill on something that would more than likely get tossed since the federal courts have ruled it unconstitutional. More frivolous spending of taxpayers' money from the Illinois government. I wouldn't expect anything less from Quinn's bunch of lackeys.

Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android

splithoof

July 10, 2013, 05:12 PM

^^^Well now. What a great opportunity for those in LE to show their true colors. Stand up for the rights of citizens, or roll over to the whims of the Chicago Old Guard.

mgkdrgn

July 10, 2013, 05:39 PM

Mgkdrgn, The bill that passed is a shall issue bill. This is Illinois, thankfully not Maryland, New Jersey or Hawaii.

To all those who said "They'll be packing on the trains in Tokyo before Illinois gets carry. Time to sit down to a nice meal of CROW!
I still ain't heard no Fat Lady.

Old Fuff

July 10, 2013, 06:49 PM

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

I would expect the “old law” to remain in effect until the effective date when the new law comes on board, (unless of course the Federal Court comes back into the picture) This could be months. However when the recently passed law does take effect - if it does, the Illinois State Police will be on very thin ice if they continued to enforce the previous statute. A number of gun-rights organizations would love to bury them in class action lawsuits. :evil:

ViniferaVizslas

July 10, 2013, 07:13 PM

The 16 hours is not a big deal. They give credit for Hunter Safety, CFP course etc up to 8 hrs so for many (most?) of us it is a one day requirement. Without this law I would be redoing my CFP class this month anyway as it is required every 3 years.

The only other real issue I have with it is the parks requirement. Parks are just open public space like sidewalks and roads. There is no "reason" guns should be prohibited. Obviously I would prefer no restrictions but that one bugs me the most. Is my boat in a park district harbor a no gun zone? hard to tell.

Trent

July 10, 2013, 09:29 PM

I would expect the “old law” to remain in effect until the effective date when the new law comes on board, (unless of course the Federal Court comes back into the picture) This could be months. However when the recently passed law does take effect - if it does, the Illinois State Police will be on very thin ice if they continued to enforce the previous statute. A number of gun-rights organizations would love to bury them in class action lawsuits. :evil:

Man I completely agree. If I had a little more money, and a whole lot more time, I'd have my lawyer tear them a new one over what they've pulled.

Now that it's been signed, let's do the math.

July 9 + 180 days for ISP to start accepting applications = January 5, 2014

Assuming (and you know what they say about that) they deliver certified instructors in a timely fashion, AND you can get in to a class before then, AND you have *everything ready to go on January 5, 2014*, you can submit your application to the Illinois State Police.

Now, several clocks start.

Local and state police have 30 days to file an objection to your application.

If no objection is filed, and you are FIRST in line, you "shall" receive your concealed carry license no later than April 5, 2014.

Here's where it gets fun. If ANY of the law enforcement agencies in Illinois objects to your application, a review board consisting solely of Governor Quinn's appointed members determines if you will be issued a license.[B]

[B]The review hearing is secret, off the record, and not subject to freedom of information act requests.[B]

At their SOLE discretion, [B]with no further oversight, the Governor appointed Review Board can delay your hearing an additional 30 days.

They can exercise this right as many times as they want. There is no limit.

So some people might get their Concealed Carry Licenses, well, about the time that hell freezes over.

There is no recourse, no appeals process.

No one is liable for abuse. All government and law enforcement officials are indemnified from civil or criminal charges under this law.

So, to recap:

9+ months to get a license
State Police controls who is certified for instruction
Can't carry anywhere worthwhile (can't protect my children)
No recourse if the review system is abused.
No recourse if the state doesn't meet the deadlines in the law. (the original bill had damage awards if they didn't issue in a timely fashion)
High cost. Even higher for out of staters.
No reciprocity.

I could go on and on, but really, at this point we're beating a dead cat.

We went from a de-facto ban, to "might as well be banned."

Trent

July 10, 2013, 09:30 PM

To recap:

The Federal Court said the State of Illinois total ban on carrying a firearm for self defense was unconstitutional.

WE ARE STILL DENIED THAT RIGHT, now over 7 months after that ruling, and for (at least) another 9 months beyond that. And what we get at the end of that road is next to worthless for most everyone. No public transportation? No public places?

Hell, I can ALREADY carry a loaded firearm at my business and home. I'm gaining the ability to carry in my car, instead of having to unload it and toss it and the loaded magazine in the glove box. Big deal. Won't be allowed to carry any other place I go to.

Local restaurant we eat lunch at, at work, is a pub. Can't carry there. (Only food in town, besides subway)

Take my kids to the pool in the park. Can't carry there.

Take my kids to the playground, can't carry there.

Etc. Virtually everywhere I go, will be banned.

I seriously hope the Federal Court smacks them.

Hard.

JTHunter

July 11, 2013, 06:21 PM

Trent asked:Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.
Certain UUW statutes still apply as OC is still banned and they can still prosecute (persecute) that.

As so many have said - "I ain't heard no fat lady yet!"

Old Fuff

July 11, 2013, 08:02 PM

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.

Not quite: The Court found that the previous Illinois statute was unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s Heller and MacDonald decisions. But it allowed the Illinois Legislature and Governor to correct the situation by amending the old law or replacing it with a new one that would provide the remedies the Court demanded. If they did nothing then there would be no law on the books.

Not wanting that, the Legislature – over the Governor’s veto – did pass a law. But now the U.S. District Judge will have to decide if the new law does or doesn’t address the conditions he said had to be remedied in a satisfactory manner. If he finds it doesn’t then we’re back to “no law.” If he is satisfied, the new law will remain in place, unless one or the other of the two sides appeals to a higher court. For the anti-gun side of the issue this poses a grave risk, because if they lost it could disqualify a lot of gun control statutes in other states.

Take this new statute, and in place of “guns” or “gun owner” or anything related. substitute the words “vote” or “voter” or related and see what it reads like.

The "Right to keep and bear arms," and to do so outside of their residence, is a Constitutionally protected civil right! Subject only to "reasonable" regulation. Now we are about to find out what's considered "reasonable."

radiotom

July 11, 2013, 10:39 PM

To recap:

The Federal Court said the State of Illinois total ban on carrying a firearm for self defense was unconstitutional.

WE ARE STILL DENIED THAT RIGHT, now over 7 months after that ruling, and for (at least) another 9 months beyond that. And what we get at the end of that road is next to worthless for most everyone. No public transportation? No public places?

Hell, I can ALREADY carry a loaded firearm at my business and home. I'm gaining the ability to carry in my car, instead of having to unload it and toss it and the loaded magazine in the glove box. Big deal. Won't be allowed to carry any other place I go to.

Local restaurant we eat lunch at, at work, is a pub. Can't carry there. (Only food in town, besides subway)

Take my kids to the pool in the park. Can't carry there.

Take my kids to the playground, can't carry there.

Etc. Virtually everywhere I go, will be banned.

I seriously hope the Federal Court smacks them.

Hard.
Isn't it also banned 1000 feet around any of those places or something like that?

Trent

July 12, 2013, 12:17 PM

Trent asked:

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.
Certain UUW statutes still apply as OC is still banned and they can still prosecute (persecute) that.

As so many have said - "I ain't heard no fat lady yet!"

Both sides have filed additional motions.

Madigan is asking for the Federal Court to render the cases MOOT.

The other side is insisting on an injunction to begin carrying immediately using the newly passed statutes as a guideline for behavior.

Trent

July 12, 2013, 12:18 PM

14 IL counties aren't waiting.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/team-14-il-counties-wont-233511639.html

Elkins45

July 13, 2013, 12:05 AM

"Chicago Democrats repulsed by gun violence got a long list of places deemed off limits to guns, including schools, libraries, parks and mass transit buses and trains

Been a lot of gunplay in Chicago libraries, has there?

joeschmoe

July 13, 2013, 01:13 AM

SAF?

usmarine0352_2005

July 13, 2013, 01:27 AM

SAF?

Second Amendment Foundation.
.

Trent

July 13, 2013, 08:27 AM

Isn't it also banned 1000 feet around any of those places or something like that?

No, we actually got parking lots and right of through-travel. The bad guys didn't get the 'adjacency' type language in it.

However, our old UUW law restricted firearms possession within 1000 feet of a school, and other areas (bumped charges to aggravated, if I recall). Which I do know was used on at least one case.

That old law is still technically active, and the old and new are in conflict in certain parts.

If you enjoyed reading about "Official: Illinois becomes last State in the nation to have Concealed Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!